The competitors -- 16 states and the District of Columbia -- now get a chance to send representatives to woo administration officials with their school reform plans, all tailored to the particular likes of Education Secretary Arne Duncan.

Ick.

The whole notion of this administration making its education initiative a kind of race where states compete for funds is counter to the desired goal of providing equal resources to children in all public schools.

Duncan is promoting charter schools and the privatization of schools, as well as a scheme to evaluate teachers by the results of standardized tests taken by students. None of the above have been shown to ensure success, but the government will spend billions forcing states to do them anyway.

California competed but lost, and Jack O'Connell, superintendent of public instruction, explained why the whole enterprise is empty.

"We put forth a solid, thoughtful application," he said. "The systemic reforms we made we made because they're the right educational strategies. It was an unprecedented opportunity to actually fund the reforms."

Federal officials want losing states to reapply, but O'Connell isn't so sure: "We had our best people working on it. Our time may be better spent helping school districts here in California."

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, lots of people who supported President Obama and had hoped he would make a clean break with No Child Left Behind and its failed emphasis on high-stakes standardized testing regime are sorely disappointed, even angry. Race to the Top program is certainly no important break from NCLB, and some believe it is worse. With the failing political fortunes of the administration, any effort to boldly reauthorize No Child Left Behind isn’t happening anytime soon.

Cognitive scientist Daniel Willingham, in this post , called Race to the Top “a doomed bribery scheme.”

This idea is another attempt to solve the ills of education by throwing federal dollars. Since the days of LBJ the federal and states have spent trillions--all for naught. The schools are a microcosm of the society as a whole.The society is sick and so are the schools.

I hope someone follows the money trail. I have a very strong suspicion that what is happening now will make the Reading First fraud look like a cookie jar raid.

Are certain people being paid to help states with the application process? If so, who? How much are they getting? What organizations do they belong to? As a taxpayer I want to know the answers to these questions.

Valerie - please do a little investigation and tell us about the efforts that Willingham and Ravitch and other academic experts are making to GET THROUGH to the president before he goes down this crash course.

SReckhow Says:
March 4th, 2010 at 3:59 pm
Two things about this list jump out at me:
- 10 of the 15 states that received funding from Gates to hire consultants for the RTT application are among the finalists. http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2009/08/gates_gives_15_states_an_edge.html
- Meanwhile, several of the states that tried to meet RTT criteria with new legislation are not finalists such as Michigan, California, and Iowa. It looks like Colorado was the only RTT finalist that passed new legislation in response to RTT but did not receive Gates funds. (though I’m not sure if my list of states that passed RTT-related legislation is complete)

Ok, so not to disagree, but what's a better idea. Also, do you think there is something that can be done in some of these other states. It seems to me they participated in the effort in good faith, and a lot of states didn't bother. So why not make a win out of this for the players.

Here are two reasons:
Because improved education shouldn't be a prize for players. It should be a service available to all american children

A win isn't possible, even for the players because the prize is rotten. The techniques and programs being funded have already been proven to be ineffective. Amazing, isn't it? The whole thing is a farce.

There are winners and losers when a grant is competitive. I think its refreshing that DOE appears to have eschewed political considerations (CA didn't make it) and stuck to their criteria.

Yes, a vaccine for educational malaise hasn't been invented, but the 4 pillars in the RTTT application are not exotic ideas at all: Tying teacher performance to student outcomes? Turning around perpetually failing schools? Using standardize measurements so states can't just lower the bar inorder to fake progress? Radical...

RttT is so typical of all plans brought forward by non-educators and/or by people who have been out of the classroom for way too long to be considered education "experts."

Most federally mandated reform plans, and the main reason they are unsuccessful, is because they tend to cubby-hole kids and schools. RttT is no different. We need to get away from the 19th century factory model of education...that is the problem. Society isn't an assembly-line and neither is teaching kids.

Ironically, flexibility is what drives the charter school movement. But Obama and "friends" are incapable of understanding that while they continue to tie the hands of public schools they are at the same time advocating for a reform where flexibilty is the key component.

The people making these decisions have already bought into the importance of "being educated." But, the majority of kids I teach (or at least the ones that cause all the problems) have not. The decision-makers have been successful...the parents of these kids were abandoned by the system, and in most cases, are having a tough time making ends meet. To most kids, the weekend is a long way away...much less think about earning a living when they are 30.

The reason many other cultures have public schools that, by all accounts, produce students that are more successful than U.S. students is because there is respect for the public schools at home and in society. Just read the comments on this site and others....people hate the public schools and teachers.

RttT doesn't address a needed change in attitude...Public schools don't need more condemnation or to turn the schools into mini-Super Bowls where success is defined by an arbitrary set of test scores that measure only the ability to memorize...where sselected subjects trump an all-around education.

I voted for Obama, although he wasn't my original choice, but it didn't take a PhD. to recognize pre-voting that his plan for the public schools was not one I could support. I wish Obama would have a Town Hall Meeting with real teachers...not leaders of the NEA/AFT or Principals...but one with those of us in the trenches.

The ten winning states are given money to develop completely on their own computer systems that basically do the same thing.

Apparently in the United States computers work differently in each different state and so the states can not use the same computer system. They have to develop on their own the computer system that will work in their state.

This is why the Federal government can not develop computer systems for public education and simply give these systems to the states free of charge.

This is also why each state in the nation has to develop their own "standardized" test to check if a student knows 2+2 equals 4.

It is surprising that the toilet paper manufacturers have not developed different toilet paper for each state in the United States.
........................
By the way the cost of Cash for Caulking is 6 billion while the cost of Race to the Bottom is 4 billion. Is it not great that the problem of public education can be solved so cheaply.

The key to these latest and greatest programs like "Race to the Top" is that because they are new, there is no accountability. After all, how can continuing lack of success be the fault of a new program? Then, by the time the snake oil has bloomed to the surface and it's clear that it's just another ineffective, overhyped fad that hopelessly oversimplifies the magnitude of the problem, its perpetrators are onto the next challenge that has - what else? - a simple solution.

"The whole notion of this administration making its education initiative a kind of race where states compete for funds is counter to the desired goal of providing equal resources to children in all public schools."

But the Dept of Ed isn't cutting funds to the rest of the schools. In fact, there's more money going to public schools then ever before. If we follow your premise that we should just fund all public schools equally, we will never reward innovation or improvements in schools. Under this model, schools get funding and some states that are adopting certain reporting, structures, and innovations get funding to continue this work.

I'm sure the California superintendent thinks they had a good proposal, but for him to disparage the whole process is disingenuous. I mean, he thought it was an okay model in which to send an application. He thought is was fine to ask for the money. Did Valarie Strauss find out WHY California didn't score as high as Tennessee? No. She just got the quote from the person who was rejected. Sounds like sour grapes. Looks like lazy reporting.

Linda/RetiredTeacher asked:
"Are certain people being paid to help states with the application process? If so, who? How much are they getting? What organizations do they belong to? As a taxpayer I want to know the answers to these questions."

Answer: Yes. Other states are getting help from the National Council for Teacher Quality's executive director, Kate Walsh. She's also a Maryland State Board of Education member. How's that for a conflict of interest?

Linda/RetiredTeacher asked:
"Are certain people being paid to help states with the application process? If so, who? How much are they getting? What organizations do they belong to? As a taxpayer I want to know the answers to these questions."

Answer: Yes. Other states are getting help from the National Council for Teacher Quality's executive director, Kate Walsh. She's also a Maryland State Board of Education member. How's that for a conflict of interest?